Hi KWintersI would ask an additional question:The ancients did not quibble about the existence of another world, it was for them a foregone conclusion - with a few notable exceptions of course.

The academic stance today seems to be the opposite.

I would ask, what tools do we have today that the ancients did not, that have caused the shift in opinion?/quote]

In a word, science. We simply KNOW more about the natural world. And the more we know the less we are impressed by claims of "spirits" as a cause of anything. There is just NO evidence for anything like that. IF such a thing exists -IF, I say - then it has no relevance simply because we cannot detect it.

How do you detect something you're not trying to detect?Why would you want to detect something opposed to science' materialist philosophy?The difference is that the ancient philosophers were active detectors and I can therefore only assume that they knew more about the subject than does modern science?NamasteAL

“We live at the level of our language. Whatever we can articulate we can imagine or explore. All you have to do to educate a child is leave him alone and teach him to read. The rest is brainwashing.” Ellen GilcristVisit my website www.n-atlantis.com

Hi KWintersI would ask an additional question:The ancients did not quibble about the existence of another world, it was for them a foregone conclusion - with a few notable exceptions of course.

The academic stance today seems to be the opposite.

I would ask, what tools do we have today that the ancients did not, that have caused the shift in opinion?/quote]

In a word, science. We simply KNOW more about the natural world. And the more we know the less we are impressed by claims of "spirits" as a cause of anything. There is just NO evidence for anything like that. IF such a thing exists -IF, I say - then it has no relevance simply because we cannot detect it.

How do you detect something you're not trying to detect?Why would you want to detect something opposed to science' materialist philosophy?The difference is that the ancient philosophers were active detectors and I can therefore only assume that they knew more about the subject than does modern science?

Because IF this "other world" mattered at all IF it had any useful measurable significant impact on this world we would KNOW it. It would be obvious that something was going on well outside the known laws of the natural world. And while many have CLAIMED such events and actions have occurred none - not a single one - has ever been established as caused by spirits from another world. IF they are out there they either don't want to be noticed or are so ineffectual in their attempts to be noticed as to be effectively invisible.

In either case irrelevant any serious discussion of THIS world.

Religion is the longest running most successful con game in history. It works because the victims never realize they have been taken. They die first.

Why would you want to detect something opposed to science' materialist philosophy?

Because that's the way we learn things. But to date none of the alternatives offered can be distinguished from the imaginary, and fond as I am of the imaginary I think it important not to confuse it with the real.

The difference is that the ancient philosophers were active detectors

Really? Whom do you have in mind?

The Greek philosophers were remarkably free of appeals to divine authority in their arguments for this or that view of moral conduct. Notwithstanding the occasional pious nod, they were substantially secular - a great achievement.

You don't think the world is made of water (Thales), or the boundless I-don't-know (Anaximander), or air (Anaximenes), or fire (Herakleitos) do you? To Pythagoras are attributed various superstitious notions about numbers, and some smart maths, but only the latter have proved useful.

I can therefore only assume that they knew more about the subject than does modern science?

Because IF this "other world" mattered at all IF it had any useful measurable significant impact on this world we would KNOW it. It would be obvious that something was going on well outside the known laws of the natural world. And while many have CLAIMED such events and actions have occurred none - not a single one - has ever been established as caused by spirits from another world. IF they are out there they either don't want to be noticed or are so ineffectual in their attempts to be noticed as to be effectively invisible.

In either case irrelevant any serious discussion of THIS world.

I think you must do some very selective reading and even more selective thinking. How do you rationalise NDE's?Ghosts seen by millions?Just read the debunking?How would anyone 'establish' that something is from the spirit world?I spoke to a spirit being today and he answered.You also can do this.Any one can.NamasteAL

“We live at the level of our language. Whatever we can articulate we can imagine or explore. All you have to do to educate a child is leave him alone and teach him to read. The rest is brainwashing.” Ellen GilcristVisit my website www.n-atlantis.com

No need to rationalize anything. The examinable evidence is very clear that NDEs (just like OBEs) never return from their experiences with information about reality that they didn't previously possess. There's no basis for thinking anything other than a mental event occurred.

Ghosts seen by millions?

We all dream. We all love a good tale. And we all have no examples whatsoever of an authenticated ghost - just some puzzles here and there.

We all dream. We all love a good tale. And we all have no examples whatsoever of an authenticated ghost - just some puzzles here and there.

You don't think the world is made of water (Thales), or the boundless I-don't-know (Anaximander), or air (Anaximenes), or fire (Herakleitos) do you? To Pythagoras are attributed various superstitious notions about numbers, and some smart maths, but only the latter have proved useful.

This hand waving will not do. "Nothing but mental" is supposition as you well know and there is no research to back it. It's become fashionable among sceptics to pretend that we are locked inside our heads and it's assumed that there is backing evidence when there is none. Another 'must be' that for some strange reason becomes a security blanket, while at the same time condemns the believer to oblivion and contradicts the very science it rely's upon by insisting on the destruction of energy.

An appeal to an authority that does not exist, because science is biased on such subjects and shy's away from doing any meaningful research. The small amount that is done is constantly attacked by sceptics who demand evidence required by no other subject.The evidence ploy works both ways!

At least one of the Greeks and maybe more that you mention was an initiate of a mystery school and dedicated to the occult, but then as today denial is required to keep their job or even their head.Your wishful thinking has no bounds it seems and extends even to history.NamasteAL

“We live at the level of our language. Whatever we can articulate we can imagine or explore. All you have to do to educate a child is leave him alone and teach him to read. The rest is brainwashing.” Ellen GilcristVisit my website www.n-atlantis.com

"I spoke to a spirit being today and he answered.You also can do this.Any one can."

And the content of that conversation?

The information received yesterday was of a personal nature.The fact that information was exchanged at all is sufficient to destroy the argument.

This kind of information is usually in areas where science fails.It's not unusual for those with a science education, to complain that their PhD provides no support in times of loss and bereavement.Science tends to very light on meaning, the very thing that is required by those in trauma.NamasteAL

“We live at the level of our language. Whatever we can articulate we can imagine or explore. All you have to do to educate a child is leave him alone and teach him to read. The rest is brainwashing.” Ellen GilcristVisit my website www.n-atlantis.com

"I spoke to a spirit being today and he answered.You also can do this.Any one can."

And the content of that conversation?

The information received yesterday was of a personal nature.The fact that information was exchanged at all is sufficient to destroy the argument.

This kind of information is usually in areas where science fails.It's not unusual for those with a science education, to complain that their PhD provides no support in times of loss and bereavement.Science tends to very light on meaning, the very thing that is required by those in trauma.

How convenient for you. Your position carefully and effectively avoids having to verify such communication. You have merely to assert such and then proclaim you have established something. You have not established anything but your arrogance intellectual dishonesty.

As for science and trauma what do they have in common? WHY should science have any bearing on personal trauma? Why should ANYTHING at all external to an individual bear on personal trauma? ?

Religion is the longest running most successful con game in history. It works because the victims never realize they have been taken. They die first.

"I spoke to a spirit being today and he answered.You also can do this.Any one can."

And the content of that conversation?

The information received yesterday was of a personal nature.The fact that information was exchanged at all is sufficient to destroy the argument.

This kind of information is usually in areas where science fails.It's not unusual for those with a science education, to complain that their PhD provides no support in times of loss and bereavement.Science tends to very light on meaning, the very thing that is required by those in trauma.

How convenient for you. Your position carefully and effectively avoids having to verify such communication. You have merely to assert such and then proclaim you have established something. You have not established anything but your arrogance intellectual dishonesty.

As for science and trauma what do they have in common? WHY should science have any bearing on personal trauma? Why should ANYTHING at all external to an individual bear on personal trauma? ?

My message involved myself and my wife moving house, something I'm sure you are not interested in. If you want a personal reading for yourself I would be gald to do you one by PM.

Science, having instilled the idea that we are purposless biological machines, living in an accidental universe takes no responsibility for the obvious psycholological implications of someone taking it seriously.

Namaste

AL

“We live at the level of our language. Whatever we can articulate we can imagine or explore. All you have to do to educate a child is leave him alone and teach him to read. The rest is brainwashing.” Ellen GilcristVisit my website www.n-atlantis.com